> I’m simply saying that anyone can fudge the numbers and claim to have “data” to support their argument. This is why reproduction & peer review of methodology

> I’m simply saying that anyone can fudge the numbers and claim to have “data” to support their argument. This is why reproduction & peer review of methodology are such important steps of the scientific method. You're not supposed to take a single person's word on what data is. This is also why certain fields like psychology have something of a credibility crisis, because so many "discoveries" have not been able to be reproduced. I'm curious though: Can you actually recall specific events of a "leftist" using a false data set or are you just engaging in general slander against your political opponents?